Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Aularches miliaris

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2014 at 08:29:24 (UTC)

Reason: I'm slowly getting the hang of insect photography and macrophotography. I found this gorgeous specimen in Dlingo, Bantul, while at an orchard, and it was kind enough to wait for me to finish photographing before scampering off. I think this crosses the bug bar, but any input would be welcome. I know this hasn't been in the article for a week yet, but it is rarely edited and this is a clear improvement over the previous image, so I think an exception can be made. A big thanks to Jee and Shyamal for helping with the identification.
Articles in which this image appears: Aularches miliaris
FP category for this image: Insects
Creator: Chris Woodrich

Support as nominator -- — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:29, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The subject is centered, the lighting is correct and the colours stand out. --///EuroCarGT 20:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Great shot, and quite an interesting looking insect too. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 21:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, A very colorful grasshopper. --CyberXRef^☎ 22:52, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Diliff. J e e 02:11, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support as above, as long as we're quite certain of the ID! J Milburn (talk) 09:51, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is certainly within their range. I mean, the government put it on a stamp and everything, and there are books in Indonesian which discuss the species in detail (side note: apparently it's called the Devil's Grasshopper in Indonesia... wow). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:04, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the issue is that there might be other very similar species out there that are superficially very similar, in which case it's not just a matter of saying 'well it's within the range and it's on a stamp, it must be the right one'. I'm not saying you're right or wrong about the ID as I'm no bug expert (I've been letting an image of mine sit in the article for some time now before nominating for FPC to be sure that it isn't misidentified), just playing devil's (ha ha) advocate. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:43, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, but I think (and J. Milburn can correct me if I'm wrong) that the comment was meant as a reference to this nomination, in which there were concerns over identification which were essentially confirmed by checking the range of the two species. That being said, before I added the image to the species article (after Jee and Syamal identified it) I went through Google image search for Aularches miliaris and eyeballed images to see how this specimen held up, only adding it to the article when I felt certain. Not scientific, sure, but that's the most I could do on my own. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People like me often make wild guess; but never from a biologist like Shyamal. We have photos of a few specimens now; 3 from India and 2 from Indonesia. So the ID is almost certain. 100% identification is not possible without microscopic examination of genitals of a collected specimen for Orthoptera, Hemiptera, Diptera, etc. The cases of butterflies and dragonflies are different; where we have more visual keys. So, if you are asking more, we have to say Aularches sp. or even Pyrgomorphidae family. :) J e e 15:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Great image and color. -- Godot13 (talk) 04:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Spectactular detail! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 04:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Aularches miliaris at Mangunan Orchard, Dlingo, Bantul, Yogyakarta 07.jpg Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]